Is there anyway to slow down the Earth's rotation?

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Electrode
Slowing down the rotation of Earth would be a bad idea. I suggest widening its orbit. Get some really, really powerful spaceships, wrap some cables around Earth, and pull it a few hundred thousand kilometers away from the sun. Not only would we have a longer day, we'd be countering global warming.

Yeah, but we wouldn't have any summer! I'd say that we should bring Earth closer to the sun. And when the temperature rises, no-one would notice the global-warming anymore

Let's just build a ringworld around the sun.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Electrode
Slowing down the rotation of Earth would be a bad idea. I suggest widening its orbit. Get some really, really powerful spaceships, wrap some cables around Earth, and pull it a few hundred thousand kilometers away from the sun. Not only would we have a longer day, we'd be countering global warming.

Yeah, but we wouldn't have any summer! I'd say that we should bring Earth closer to the sun. And when the temperature rises, no-one would notice the global-warming anymore

Let's just build a ringworld around the sun.

Why a ring? Why not just do a full sphere? That way we'd have low, and zero G areas for recreation, and the infirm.

But whatever you do, don't adopt that auto-aircar system. :|

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Electrode
Slowing down the rotation of Earth would be a bad idea. I suggest widening its orbit. Get some really, really powerful spaceships, wrap some cables around Earth, and pull it a few hundred thousand kilometers away from the sun. Not only would we have a longer day, we'd be countering global warming.

Yeah, but we wouldn't have any summer! I'd say that we should bring Earth closer to the sun. And when the temperature rises, no-one would notice the global-warming anymore

Let's just build a ringworld around the sun.

Dysons Sphere would be alot cooler

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: ed21x
get a giant spacecraft (understand it has to be HUGE) and use a line to pull on the side to slow the spin. easy as that

No, that wouldn't work... You'd need two of them, one for each side of the planet. Otherwise you'd just pull the planet out of its orbit around the Sun, and that would be a bad thing.



Grasshopper <--- given this too much thought myself

 

[tcsenter]

We could install massive rockets on Earth. We'd just have to make sure that they are firmly attached to the ground. And then we just ignite them. Hmmmm....

If only Howard Hughes was still around. It would be fun to watch those suckers ignite and burn (then probably explode, leveling a couple nearby towns), even if it didn't work!

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1

Let's just build a ringworld around the sun.

Why a ring? Why not just do a full sphere? That way we'd have low, and zero G areas for recreation, and the infirm.

A ring world would be possible within reason, a Dyson Sphere is not reasonable. The amount of matter required to build such a construct would require star harvesting for hundreds of light years in every direction. The shell would need to withstand forces beyond anything even our Sun has to deal with. It would need to be about 40,000 miles thick. Again, the amount of material required to build a shell twice as thick as the Earth is all the way around the Sun is hard to imagine.

There is currently enough matter in the Solar System (not counting our Sun) to build a sphere 10 feet thick. To build one 40,000 miles thick would require matter from 211,200 solor systems (counting their stars). If you have the ability to harvest 211,200 solor systems for matter, then you don't need a Dyson Sphere in the first place.

On the plus side, growing room would not be an issue for awhile. The interior surface area of the Dyson sphere exceeds the total surface area of Earth by a factor of just over half a billion. Since all the surface area would be as close or as far as the builders wanted (mountains or flat lands), all of the space would be habbitable. This means that we would have 2 to 3 billion times more liveable surface area than we do now.

Every man, woman, and child could be instantly given 25 million square miles of land (half the Earth's livable surface area) What you'd actually DO with 25 million square miles of land is another matter.

Grasshopper

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Originally posted by: grasshopper26

What you'd actually DO with 25 million square miles of land is another matter.

Sell it on Ebay.

 

[Shalmanese]

Originally posted by: grasshopper26

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1

Let's just build a ringworld around the sun.

Why a ring? Why not just do a full sphere? That way we'd have low, and zero G areas for recreation, and the infirm.

A ring world would be possible within reason, a Dyson Sphere is not reasonable. The amount of matter required to build such a construct would require star harvesting for hundreds of light years in every direction. The shell would need to withstand forces beyond anything even our Sun has to deal with. It would need to be about 40,000 miles thick. Again, the amount of material required to build a shell twice as thick as the Earth is all the way around the Sun is hard to imagine.

There is currently enough matter in the Solar System (not counting our Sun) to build a sphere 10 feet thick. To build one 40,000 miles thick would require matter from 211,200 solor systems (counting their stars). If you have the ability to harvest 211,200 solor systems for matter, then you don't need a Dyson Sphere in the first place.

On the plus side, growing room would not be an issue for awhile. The interior surface area of the Dyson sphere exceeds the total surface area of Earth by a factor of just over half a billion. Since all the surface area would be as close or as far as the builders wanted (mountains or flat lands), all of the space would be habbitable. This means that we would have 2 to 3 billion times more liveable surface area than we do now.

Every man, woman, and child could be instantly given 25 million square miles of land (half the Earth's livable surface area) What you'd actually DO with 25 million square miles of land is another matter.

Grasshopper

Why 40,000 miles? what are you assuming this thing is going to be made out of? Dirt? Hell, even the Earth isn't 40,000 miles thick and it seems to have withstood everything the sun has thrown at it. I would say a good 2 - 3 miles of dirt on top of a 2 mile hard base would be good enough to simulate most enviromental effects.

BTW: Angular momentum is conserved so you would have to figure out a place to store all that energy.

 

[FenrisUlf]

Originally posted by: Shalmanese
Why 40,000 miles? what are you assuming this thing is going to be made out of? Dirt? Hell, even the Earth isn't 40,000 miles thick and it seems to have withstood everything the sun has thrown at it. I would say a good 2 - 3 miles of dirt on top of a 2 mile hard base would be good enough to simulate most enviromental effects.

Gravity. You need mass to provide gravity. You couldn't spin a Dyson Sphere or the gravity over it's surface would be irregular, tapering to zero at the poles, making a large chunk of your surface unlivable. Plus the angular velocity of spin would require incredibly strong materials to withstand the centripital force. A bigger problem with the Dyson sphere is providing day/night cycles. And getting rid of excess heat - if all of a star's energy is being dumped into the inside of the sphere, it's going to heat up. The earth has only half its surface area exposed to the sun at once and half exposed to space to radiate excess heat. The only way to get rid of the heat in a Dyson sphere is to transfer it to the outside of the sphere, and all the dirt and structure would make pretty good insualtion. I think a Ringworld would be a better idea. Read Larry Niven's "Ringworld" for some good technical info (don't forget to read the postscript info on the science and engineering research he had to do on the design).

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: Shalmanese

Why 40,000 miles? what are you assuming this thing is going to be made out of? Dirt? Hell, even the Earth isn't 40,000 miles thick and it seems to have withstood everything the sun has thrown at it. I would say a good 2 - 3 miles of dirt on top of a 2 mile hard base would be good enough to simulate most enviromental effects.

BTW: Angular momentum is conserved so you would have to figure out a place to store all that energy.

It would come apart and buckle if it were that thin, even if you made it out of perfect carbon nanotubes.

Read my other thread on this subject to see the formula. In any case, it would have to be thick enough to withstand its own size and mass.

Grasshopper

 

[dfi]

Put up your hands and arms. That will provide wind resistance and slow things down.

dfi

 

[BoberFett]

Have every person in China start jumping up and down.

Oh wait, that's how you start earthquakes.

 

[dabuddha]

stick all the robots in the world in one section and have them release their exhaust at once

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: grasshopper26
A ring world would be possible within reason, a Dyson Sphere is not reasonable. The amount of matter required to build such a construct would require star harvesting for hundreds of light years in every direction. The shell would need to withstand forces beyond anything even our Sun has to deal with. It would need to be about 40,000 miles thick. Again, the amount of material required to build a shell twice as thick as the Earth is all the way around the Sun is hard to imagine.

There is currently enough matter in the Solar System (not counting our Sun) to build a sphere 10 feet thick. To build one 40,000 miles thick would require matter from 211,200 solor systems (counting their stars). If you have the ability to harvest 211,200 solor systems for matter, then you don't need a Dyson Sphere in the first place.

I bet Bill Gates could afford it

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: FenrisUlf
Gravity. You need mass to provide gravity. You couldn't spin a Dyson Sphere or the gravity over it's surface would be irregular, tapering to zero at the poles, making a large chunk of your surface unlivable.

True, and that's something Ringworld doesn't suffer from. But OTOH, Dysons Sphere still has alot more livable space than Ringworld does. the poles wouldn't have any gravity, but you could use that area for energy generation. The amount of energy you could get by covering the poles of a Dyson Sphere with hyper-advances solar-panels (or whatever they use in that time) would be unreal.